The Daily News opinion blog

Main menu

Post navigation

God talk, talk talk

I’ve had the privilege of lunching with the good Professor D, and I can tell you that I could sit at his feet all day and learn great new insights from him about life, about Judaism, about Islam and about Christianity.

So I want to nudge him gently on what he means by this, from his most recent post:

Why do we assume when we say God that we mean the same thing, and that it refers to a specific religion and theology? Operationally, of course, it doesn’t…. Do I experience the divine? Absolutely. Is mine bigger and better and more real than yours? That is a non-sense question. We do not capture the infinite in the net of our words. Poets come closer than theologians.

In the end, I suspect the average Joe cares about neither the theologians nor the poets. (I say that as a former amateur theologian who spent long hours in the Fuller library boning up on every possible theological angle that I could teach to religious groups). But Joe happily signs up to fight anyway, over the course of history and to this day, usually on the basis of religion — e.g., the group that is statistically most likely, within America, to believe that we must bomb and/or invade Muslim nations happen to be, you guessed it, evangelical Christians. If compelled to argue against such an approach, Diane or others may argue that these people are simply lapsing from a “true relationship” with God.

And that gets society back where we started — getting warlike angry over even the tiny particulars of faith. Not everyone has the same view of God, and Buddhists and Hindus can be all over the map. But we have problems even when there is some agreement (maybe especially where there is some agreement). Muslims and Christians and Jews and Western monotheists generally look to the same God, but they quibble about what he/She is like and what a relationship with Her involves. That causes incredible consternation, along with wars, even today.

My question is, Who referees all this? Who referees the disputes, within one religion and across religions? “Ditchkins” argue against the whole enterprise, because they feel that it’s impossible to police. And they cite moderates as being chickens who rationalize the excesses of the mob.

Jonathan, is it enough to say that the poets are right…? The poets police nothing and they seem to guide no one.

First. You are seriously out of touch with evangelical Christians as a group if you think they want to “bomb and invade” Muslim nations. Most of the evangelical Christians in this country (just like every other American) had a pretty live-and-let-live attitude toward “Muslim nations” until the Muslim nations brought it home on 9/11. Even now, that is a gross mis-statement to say that’s what Christians think we “must” do… “statistically.” Exactly whose statistics are you quoting there? And if all Christians thought that, there would be a heckuva lot more support for sending even more troops to the Middle East, would there not? Perhaps I misunderstood what you were saying. Because it makes no sense.

And let’s say for a minute that you are right. Christians as a group think we must invade and bomb Muslim nations (which again, is ridiculous–but suspend your disbelief). So I am then forced to argue, as you anticipate above, that such an attitude shows a lack of understanding of the nature of God and the grace He offers. Yes, that’s right Rob. That’s what I would argue. As I would hope anyone of any “faith” would argue against a wrong they perceive being committed anywhere anytime. The fact that you can anticipate my argument makes it no less valid.

The question “who gets to referee” assumes that there is some all-powerful entity that could.

And you are being disingenous, if you’re discussing modern times, which I assume you are. No point in discussing who would “referee” fights that have already happened. So it is somewhat dishonest to attempt to claim that because a Christian and a Jew do not agree on what a relationship with God entails — that wars are being caused by this now. Please detail for me where this Christian/Jewish war is currently underway.

I am not sure one can say that about the Muslim faith, because it seems there are specific teachings there that would militate toward aggression against, for instance, Christians/Jews. Is that not what “jihad” involves? However, the Jews/Christians were not militating against the Muslims. And there is nothing in their scripture to point to that. Don’t pretend that “all religions” are “causing wars” because that is simply not the case in today’s world.

There are other places in the world where certain faiths are being persecuted. So single out the persecutor and condemn them. Don’t condemn “all religion” — that’s rather throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Again, I will say this. A true follower of Jesus Christ does not require trappings of religion. This is evidenced by the way Christians around the globe are living even today… without much of what American Christians consider part-and-parcel of their faith. Most of it is not.

Jonathan Dobrer

Two brief points (okay, maybe three).
1.If we substitute the word love for God don’t we see that we kind of all experience it, and experience it uniquely? I may not love what you do but I cannot judge it as inauthentic. My friends who experience God in one way or Christ in their hearts give me no reason to doubt their experience without making it either mine or invalidating mine.
2. THe vehemence of the exchanges on this as well as on political issues shows that religion is not the culprit–only one of the uniforms. Getting rid of religion would solve nothing. It would be like outlawing red and blue dye and expecting Crips and Bloods to stop fighting. We mistake the cause with the organizing principle.
3. The central irony of my life is that I make my living with words and I know them to be weak instruments for conveying the most real and profound experiences of my life. Yet we fight about metaphors and miss the central messages of most prophets and humanists. Be kind to each other and behold with wonder, appreciation and humility the mystery of existence.

Diane Schrader

That was three points, indeed, but all very valid.

However, I would maintain that God is not a “concept” like love. He is a “person” albeit unlike us. So to say one experiences Him differently than another is like saying one experiences Jonathan or Diane differently than another. And that is not invalid either. But it’s not quite the same thing as “love” or “hate” or any other abstract.

David Long

Diane- God is a wart on the butt of Humanity that should be excised. No other force has killed so many and thwarted intellectual progress more than the moribund enforcement of the delusional dogma that that claims absolute supremacy based on the accumulated myths and superstitions of our ancestors. Religion is a fraud and a cheat, a crutch and an excuse to hate others for the chauvinistic reason that they do not see things your way.

Diane Schrader

Actually (as I ignore your juvenile frothing at the mouth and focus on the only point you tried to make), God and/or religion has not thwarted intellectual progress at all, but inspired it. More on this later.

David Long

Diane – Like the Taliban, some religious people properly slapped to the ground just keep getting up to reassert their ignorance. Whatever you further dredge up, I’ll just counter it in advance by referring to the way religion treated Galileo, and when the Christians destroyed the library at Alexandria because it contained ideas contrary to church dogma.